Memory Alpha talk:Featured articles
Shouldn't we post featured articles every day?- B-101 01:20, 2 Sep 2004 (CEST) :*gapes* Why?! It's hard enough getting one posted a week, let alone one a day. There's simply too little time, and too few articles (we would be recycling them roughly once a month - certainly too short a timespan). -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 02:56, Sep 2, 2004 (CEST) ::Okay then. But, eventually, we should go to each day, when we get a whole lot more article.- B-101 15:46, 2 Sep 2004 (CEST) Didn't we already have the superweapon search? And what was the last featured article?- B-101 14:40, 29 Sep 2004 (CEST) *No. We had the actual superweapon but not the search for it. Two different articles. Ryan123450 18:25, Sep 29, 2004 (CEST) Seems the Bajoran wormhole and Ezri Dax could both benefit from some reoganization, with Ezri Dax it may be as simple as some categorie headings. They are both great informitive articles and I don't think they should be removed from featured articles. It seems having them featured has stalled their progress, they are no longer being improved. Ezri Dax has been edited once since Oct and the Bajoran wormhole has been untouched since Sept. Tyrant 14:52, 16 Jan 2005 (CET)Tyrant :Ezri Dax is "stalled" quite simply because it is complete! I made sure of it. And why would it need reorganisation? -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 15:53, Jan 16, 2005 (CET) Perhaps it is simply a matter of opinion, I ment no disrespect. I just thought it would be more useful to be able to scan a table of headings in order to look for certain information about the character, reading all of the article to seek particular details makes using the arcitle as a reference guide a little tricky. Tyrant 15:57, 16 Jan 2005 (CET)Tyrant Replacing this page Is there any need for this page anymore? Why not link directly to Category:Memory Alpha featured articles instead? --Dalen 11:29, 19 Mar 2005 (EST) I agree. This page is just a waste of time while clicking through to get to the list of featured articles. I think there should be a link to the voting on candiates page from the big list, and that the main page should link directly to the list. Tobyk777 22:00, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) Where was it decided to change this page to it's new and current format, just wondering? - AJHalliwell 00:58, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC) :Please see the discussion below. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 02:53, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC) Featured Article Accessibility Ive noticed that on the Main page, there is only 1 (Hard to find) link to featured articles. Even after clicking on that you have to click anohter link to get to the complete list. I am sure that there are many MA users who just browse (for info on Trek) and don't edit. For these users (but also for interactive users)I think that there should be a more obivous link to our featured articles. They're supposed to be "featured", as in "On Display" but really, they're not on display, and for newcomers hard to acess, (Especialy if the newcomer doesn't know they exist.) Mabe on the Main Page we could have 5 or 6 Featured articles listed, then a large link which says more featured articles, To fix this problem. Tobyk777 05:13, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) * Perhaps we could see to adding "Featured article nominees" to the Utilities links in the 'recent changes text' and, in turn, removing the " " link? It would look something like this: 'updated recent changes text'. --Alan del Beccio 05:36, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) * I agree; I know I personally don't go hunting (specifically) the "old pages" to often. I like the "recent changes" idea. Although to pick hairs, maybe put it between "New pages" and "Pages needing an attention". - AJHalliwell 05:45, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ** I'm not just talking about the aceesiblity of voting on the nominations. I think we need a system where the acutal articles are "Featured" in the greatest sense of the word. Tobyk777 17:54, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ***We already have that on the "article of the week" on the Main Page-- from which point they are very easily accessable. The whol point of the main page is that it is going to be the first place new members visit. --Alan del Beccio 21:14, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ** The main page only displays one featured article, and only part of it. I just think that the rest of them should be a little more "Featured". I don't think that in our current setup the "featured articles are any more featured than the non-featured articles. *** I see no problem with how things currently are. The whole point of the partial featured article on the front page is to get the reader to want to read the rest of it within -- a rather common writing/newsarticle/newsbroadcast tactic. A link to the list of featured articles is on the front page; you cant get much more featured than having an entire list of featured articles. If you want to read the whole article, go to the articles page, otherwise, why create duplicate pages with duplicate content... --Alan del Beccio 08:16, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) **** The link doesn't go to the list, there is pointless page in between. If you look on that pages' talk, it says that sevral people belive that that page shouldn't be there. It simply delays people from getting to the list. I think it should be deleted. Also, i propose (if there is a way to do this) enlarging the font on the main page in the link which says Featured Articles and changing the text to More Featured Articles Tobyk777 22:07, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) ***** A long time ago before categories were introduced, the featured articles were simply added to a list on Memory Alpha:Featured articles and divided by type, i.e. person, place, ship, etc. Once the category was established, someone must have decided the list wasn't needed anymore and simply redirected to Category:Memory Alpha featured articles, but never requested a change to the link on the Main Page. For now, I've changed it so it now goes directly to the category and cuts out the middle man. Perhaps we should also bring back some sort of content to Memory Alpha:Featured articles as well? Somewhat like what we had before and what Wikipedia has now? As it stands the category page is just an unordered alphabetical list and isn't really useful for browsing a subject area of interest. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 22:39, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) ******I've started to arrange a list like it exists at Wikipedia. While doing this I've noticed that the "alphabetical" category isn't really alphabetical, all characters are sorted by their first name. --Memory 23:44, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC) *******This was brought up when we first started using categories... it isn't possible to sort alpha by last name (or ship name) without adding the category to each page and also keep the category link on the template... now that we've got many more featured articles, maybe we should reevaluate whether or not it's a good idea to include the category as part of the template. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 02:47, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC) * Although I guess this is somewhat off topic, now since it is lost at the top of this conversation, would anyone still have a problem with changing our Recentchangestext to this? --Alan del Beccio 03:14, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC) week/month I thought it was article of the week, not article of the month. The Rotarran has been up there for weeks. C'mon, if you can't do it, let someone else who can do it _or_ change it to article of the month or something. --Babaganoosh 14:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC) Bold links on this page Is there any significance to the boldedness or lack of it, among all the article links on the MA:FA page? 198.49.180.40 20:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC) :Yes. To quote the page, "Articles in bold have already been on the main page and are ineligible to be featured there again. For a complete alphabetical list of articles, see the category page." --From Andoria with Love 20:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Are the five Series articles Featured or not? Presence here, with links (bold or otherwise), would indicate to me that they're Featured Articles, but the articles themselves show no evidence of Featuredness. Are they eligible for AotW? SwishyGarak 01:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC) Just in case it's not clear, the articles I'm talking about are under Memory_Alpha:Featured_articles#Episodes as follows * Star Trek: The Original Series ** ...list of episodes that are FA * Star Trek: The Next Generation * Star Trek: Deep Space Nine * Star Trek: Voyager * Star Trek: Enterprise SwishyGarak 01:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC) :: No, I don't believe they are featured. Ideally (along with Star Trek: The Animated Series and any movies) they could and should be featured someday. No one has ever bothered to nominate them for featured status. :: There's no rule that say they can't be featured (they need to be featured for AotW), nor should there be. I'm surprised that none have been nominated, afaik.--Tim Thomason 03:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC) Template protection. I think only administrators should have the ability to use this template. Right now, unless I am wrong, anyone can simply put it on any article, no matter how poorly done. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 06:45, 13 October 2007 (UTC) :I disagree. Because we are so many, a non-featured article could show up. But also, we are so many that it would be removed when we discover it. Unless you want to go against the idea of having the normal people taking care of their encyclopedia, then we could make this a page only admins can edit. :Sure, some pages should be protected so only admins can use them, like the ability to protect pages and ban users, but I don't like the idea that it should exist many pages that only admins can edit.-- Örlogskapten... Channel Open... 09:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC) ::Actually, the suggestion reads as if template use (the act of placing in an article) is supposed to be restricted. This can't be done anyway. -- Cid Highwind 10:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Ok. As long as there is some kind of check and balance, even if it is as simple as administrators keeping an eye on these featured articles articles, spotting when an unapproved article appears on the list, and removing the 'illegally added' template. – [[User:Eyes Only|''Watching...]][[User Talk:Eyes Only| ''listening...]] 13:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC) :::Doesn't just have to be admins. Anyone can partake in the checks and balances system. That's the whole design of a wiki. Just as Shran wrote on your talk page about it. -- Sulfur 14:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Additional Tag Proposal I have been tinkering with a new Featured Article tag for the top of the article to inform casual readers which articles are the best of our work. The message at the bottom is great, but doesn't always get noticed unless the reader is looking for it. The addition of a small image tag at the top underneath the POV tag (if there is one) is the perfect solution to this. It would allow users instantaneously recognize the highest quality work that our project has to offer while remaining mostly unobtrusive. I have uploaded one possibility of what this image could be. It features the Memory Alpha logo in gold with the words "Featured Article" underneath outlined in blue. It could be placed as is or resized to whatever the community agrees upon. (Although much smaller and it becomes virtually illegible, but it could be remedied as well.) Please consider this proposal as I believe it will improve the visibility of our Featured Articles. – Topher 19:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC) :Hi, I think that image is big, and we'd wind up with the full-size MA logo in both top corners of the page. How about something that's more the size of the POV tag? Good idea, though. It should be at the beginning. TribbleFurSuit 20:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC) ::I agree with TFS - much too big, and shouldn't be the MA logo. I've done a rough edit in Photoshop on a tag I think would be more suitable, with an interesting tweak for the realworld articles, to avoid having to shift the template down, and cause formatting problems. Image:FAtag.png|The basic tag (rough, larger than actual size)) Image:FAtagproposal.jpg|Tag in use on USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) Image:FAtagproposal_rw.jpg|Realworld template adaptation on Broken Bow (episode) ::The realworld tag version would be sourced from a new template to replace in those particular instances - (or something). As I say, this is a rough edit - I can certainly try and tweak it to look better, by all means. Or, if someone can improve the design, go ahead. The template will look better when coded, instead of cut-paste shifting of the text. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 20:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC) :Getting somewhere - but I think if a FA has 2 tags, it's OK. I don't know about the need to combine the proposed FA tag with the existing Realworld tag. Please see an example here. TribbleFurSuit 22:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC) I don't mind if we don't use my original tag, but at least we're talking about it now. The reason I used the MA logo was because I thought it would be like a gold medal or some such. I do like the Starfleet logo for it if using the MA logo is out, but I think we need to make sure it has a descriptor on it as in TFS's example. Either make it part of the image itself or like TFS has it. Just the arrowhead doesn't give enough explanation as to what it is doing there. – Topher 06:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC) Update: I have tried again and have incorporated the MA logo a little into a tag that would not need a description for it. It looks like a medal with laurels around it. I am not great with photoshop, but I think it is very presentable. As you can see here, the tag is not much bigger than the realworld picture tag and is also looks quite good on in-universe articles, too. Hopefully after the long Memorial Day weekend here in the USA, we'll have more contributors and be able to get a better feel for what the general population wants. ::That's better, but the execution still isn't quite right - it doesn't fit right simply inserted there. A suggestion: remove the text and the MA symbol, leaving the gold Federation emblem. Reduce the image dimensions to 50x40 px. Then, use the style that TFS gave above - this would make it match the realworld template, and would look much neater stacked beneath it. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 17:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC) ::::I agree something at the top of an article alerting a reader to the page's featured status would be great. I like Michael's suggestion and Topher's updated gold Federation emblem, so I think we should combine the two. That's my suggestion, anyway. --From Andoria with Love 18:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC) :Hey Topher, nice work on the logo. I like the wheaty Federation logo (I already saw your newer version that's blank in the center), I think it's a good direction to go in. --TribbleFurSuit 19:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC) : There are a few decisions to make, after we decide if we want this new tag. If so, there are 2 ways to do it: :*We can create one new stand-alone articletype tag which would be stacked with any others on a page, like I was advocating (demo here), in which case we'll have to solve some template programming issues. Particularly: the templates will have to contain some logic that presents a different CSS positioning declaration depending on whether only one or more than one such tag are present. Otherwise they layer right over each other and one gets hidden (my example has an explicit CSS declaration which pushes the FA tag into visible page space - this won't work when FA is the only tag present, without Realworld, because it will be in the wrong place) :*...or create multiple versions so that a single combined articletype tag can be shown on a page, like Topher originally demonstrated (third screenshot above). This will require drafting new versions of sidebar templates which include the tags. The episode template always calls the realworld tag, but if its a FA as well, we would need a episode-featured template that calls the alternative combined RQ/FA tag instead. :Personally, I think that each option probably will require a similar level of efffort. I actually don't know if the logic I described in the first option can be done with the template language we're using, but instead of trying to let the template "figure out" whether extra "articletype" boxes are present, maybe a sidebar template parameter can be created so the author can specify whether it's FA or not. At least that would make that decision-making step the author's job rather than some wikiscript's job. :So, decisions would be: Which do we even want? One tag or two? And, if two, how to do it? Build extra sidebar templates, or, retrofit the ones we have with program logic or a sidebar template parameter? And create some contingency for when it's a RW/FA article with no sidebar template at all? :The main reason I would prefer to have separate RW and FA articletype templates instead of combined ones is that it will keep the number of templates to a minimum - there will only be one new one. Any sidebars that also include articletype templates can be simply upgraded instead of multiplied/duplicated. --TribbleFurSuit 19:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC) ::Actually, I believe there's a simple solution to that problem - what's needed is an #if statement in the template code. Here's what would happen: the new box would go in , using the code you've used, with }|style="margin-top: 6em;"}} inserted into the tag. The featured template then has an extra component for realworld articles, being inserted as , which activates the extra CSS positioning. If that extra component is not present, the box simply displays at the very top. It doesn't require changing sidebars, nor creating additional templates, not even for the featured box. ::This is assuming I've got my parser function logic correct, but I'll need to test the coding first, so stand by for confirmation. Test completed - mission successful! Template,in-universe article, realworld article with sidebar, and realworld article without sidebar -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 19:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)